Reassessment under s.148A held valid; s.69 additions totaling Rs.7,00,000 deleted after acceptable contemporaneous explanations for property investmen...
Adjudication set aside; Rule 9 valuation based on internet engineer report quashed for Rule 3(4) non-compliance; Section 138B cross-examination requir...
The HC holds that DGIT (Investigation) possessed supervisory and administrative jurisdiction over the CIT(A)-11 and, notwithstanding a directive to refrain from adjudicating pending appeals, the CIT(A)-11 adjudicated numerous appeals after the specified date. The impugned orders passed by the CIT(A)-11 after 18.06.2018 are declared erroneous, illegal and without jurisdiction. The HC affirms the ITAT's orders setting aside those CIT(A)-11 determinations, upholds the ITAT's exercise of jurisdiction to set aside and transfer matters as appropriate, and dismisses the appeals challenging the ITAT's decisions, thereby denying the assessee relief on the contested rectification and transfer issues.
The HC holds that DGIT (Investigation) possessed supervisory and administrative jurisdiction over the CIT(A)-11 and, notwithstanding a directive to refrain from adjudicating pending appeals, the CIT(A)-11 adjudicated numerous appeals after the specified date. The impugned orders passed by the CIT(A)-11 after 18.06.2018 are declared erroneous, illegal and without jurisdiction. The HC affirms the ITAT's orders setting aside those CIT(A)-11 determinations, upholds the ITAT's exercise of jurisdiction to set aside and transfer matters as appropriate, and dismisses the appeals challenging the ITAT's decisions, thereby denying the assessee relief on the contested rectification and transfer issues.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
